Re: [CCAMP] radio-link and carrier-termination iana interface types

["Yemin (Amy)" <[e-mail]>]

Hi Tom and Theodoros,

Thanks for the discussion.
In the current draft the type defintion for radio-link-terminal and carrier-termination is under ietf-microwave-types model. But it should be better to add them to IANA-ifType registry.
Today we talked with the IANA delegates, it's suggested to add the request in the IANA section of the draft. 
Whether the MIB type registry is created will be decided by the IANA. From this draft, it's not necessary to ask for MIB  registry. However the MIB registry may be automaticlly created when creating the ifType registry. 
Another draft updated will be provided soon. 

BR,
Amy
________________________________________
发件人: tom petch [[e-mail]]
发送时间: 2018年11月8日 0:38
收件人: Yemin (Amy); Kallimanis Theodoros; [e-mail]; [e-mail]; [e-mail]; [e-mail]; [e-mail]
主题: Re: [CCAMP] radio-link and carrier-termination iana interface types

----- Original Message -----
From: "Yemin (Amy)" <[e-mail]>
Sent: Wednesday, November 07, 2018 8:00 AM

> Hi Theodoros,
>
> I discussed with serveral people at the IETF week, the answer is the
same as Tom gave.
> We cannot use a YANG model to ask for IANA registry for MIB.

Amy

That is not right.  A request is made to IANA in the IANA Considerations
for a new interface type, they pass it to the Designated Expert.  If the
request is granted, then the YANG Interface Type module and the SMI
Interface Type module are updated.  Easy peasy.

The request needs to reference a suitable technical defintion in a
stable source as judged by the Designated Expert.  RFC, ITU-T
Recommendations qualify; web pages generally do not (although one of the
W3C should:-)

Tom Petch





> As YANG is normally used by NETCONF/RESTCONF, MIB is used by SNMP.
> If there's interest on MIB, another draft should be sumbitted and ask
for the registry.
>
> BR,
> Amy
> ________________________________________
> 发件人: tom petch [[e-mail]]
> 发送时间: 2018年11月1日 21:10
> 收件人: Kallimanis Theodoros; [e-mail];
[e-mail]; Yemin (Amy); [e-mail];
[e-mail]; [e-mail]
> 主题: Re: [CCAMP] radio-link and carrier-termination iana interface
types
>
> ---- Original Message -----
> From: "Kallimanis Theodoros" <[e-mail]>
> To: <[e-mail]>; <[e-mail]>;
> <[e-mail]>; <[e-mail]>;
> <[e-mail]>; <[e-mail]>
> Sent: Wednesday, October 31, 2018 10:27 AM
>
> Hello
>
> I would like to ask a question regarding to ietf-microwave-types
module.
>
> For radio-link-terminal and carrier-termination, is it expected that
> these new interface-types will be also registered at IANA Interface
Type
> registry for  IANAifType-MIB?
>
> <tp>
>
> The strict answer is no, they will not be added to the registry.  They
> are only added when the IANA Cosiderations asks IANA to do so and this
> I-D makes no such request.
>
> If such a request were made, then they would be added both to the
> IANA-maintained MIB Module and to the IANA-maintained YANG  module.
>
> I did think of this a year ago and thought them too specific to CCAMP,
> worth putting into a YANG module but not inflicting them on the IETF
at
> large, but do not think this ever got discussed on the WG list.
>
> Tom Petch
>
>
> BEST REGARDS
>
> Theodoros Kallimanis
> Principal Engineer (Systems & SW)
>
> Department SSD
> ______________________________________
> Intracom Telecom
> 19.7 km Markopoulou Ave., Peania, GR 19002
>
> Building A3, 2nd floor
> t:   [phone]
> f:   [phone]
> m: [phone]
>  <mailto:[e-mail]> [e-mail]
>  <http://www.intracom-telecom.com/> www.intracom-telecom.com
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
--
> --------
>
>
> > _______________________________________________
> > CCAMP mailing list
> > [e-mail]
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ccamp
> >
>
>